Yes. Could >> I just wonder if we could do a quick uh moment of silence for Charles Margaritas who passed away who was uh deputy chief, one of our first EMTs. >> I didn't. >> Thank you. >> Okay,
then we have we're going to start with joint meeting of the planning board and the master plan implementation committee for their update. Planning board members, master plan implementation. You are wearing two
hats simultaneously. >> Grab a chance here. Thanks for your time. >> Thank you. You got yours. It >> was right. It is fun. >> All right. So, the uh master plan
implementation committee has been active for a year or so. >> For a year from 12th >> January, right? um and as was stipulated is going to report twice annually right now. And take it away, Norm.
>> Okay. Are we going to be able to bring the presentation up on >> Yes, it was uh almost a perfect year >> from kickoff to now. Okay.
And in that interim time, we've had this is our 17th meeting, so we've been pretty busy. We'll do a quick review of some of the accomplishments we fairly quickly on page two here. As you know, we established delays on approach to
communicate with the 24 lead organizations. We implemented a process to allow changes to the master plan and that's to modify, to cancel, to transfer um and to add a new a new item.
We do have a re revision log that we keep track of every change we've made. We have a measurement package in place and 100% of the lead organizations prioritize their action items and the support groups also prioritize
their support action items and we were able to compare the two. We found some interesting some interesting items between the two. Year one and year two scheduling planned action item completion is in progress. I'll show you some results of that
shortly. We added a high school representative to to the committee. Josh Raymond joined us. There have been some resistance to the ownership of lead action items and we'll discuss that on a future chart as well.
And we've done some benchmarking with other towns. We researched other towns and we've come up with 20 towns that have had impex and we've done some benchmarking on two particularly found that the granularity
that's been a complaint of of our action items is common to the other organizations as well. uh difference in size of of the organizations. We're currently operating in three with three. Uh we had we had five and that's our
upper limit at this point in time, but we lost two key people for because their jobs changed dramatically. But one of the two other organizations got 16 members. They're actually doing a lot of the work themselves to um
finalize the accomplishments of the action items. >> [snorts] >> And we've both had uh similarities with poor poor response times from organizations. That's a common common problem. Now we'll move to page three. >> Hey Norm, before you go on.
>> Yes. >> Might want to introduce the planning board members and EMPIC members for everyone else that's in the room that may not know what everyone's role is here. >> Well, thanks for reminding me. I guess I officially need to call the Empic meeting to order. >> Oh, sure.
>> Our members are here. Diane Gail, Dave Spina, and myself, Norm Shever, and I'll let the planning board >> to open our official meeting. Jessica Thornton, board chair, >> Marcus Phelps, member, Dave Fina, vice chair.
>> And online with us is Diane Jesba and potentially Jason Grimwald. I didn't see if he was on there. >> Hi. >> Well, I thought I saw him from Never mind. >> No, thank you, Doug. Okay. On page three, we have uh what was
handed to us by the planning uh board was 136 action items. You can see where which chapters they came from. There have been seven additions. Five were made by Empic, two by by the police department. We've canceled one so far.
So that right now we have 142 action items that we'll be talking as we move forward. On page four, I'm not going to go into the details of this, but here are the seven new action items that have been added. You can read them at your
leisure. We move to page five. 142 action items break down to the following groups. Planning board 31, select board 21, economic development 16, so on and so forth.
Okay, we've had some some criticism that we're burdening the organizations um unfairly. This chart addresses that a little bit. There are five of the 24 lead action groups that have only one action item.
That's 21% of 24. Seven additional organizations only have two or three. That's another 29%. So 50% of the organizations only have two or three or one, two or three patch items. Another six have four to five.
Another 25%. Three have 8 to nine and three have greater than 15. Of those six groups that have eight eight behind eight, four of them very enthused about
accomplishing their task and I have no problem that they to do that. [clears throat] Page seven, there've been several revisions to the original master plan. I already mentioned the seven new action
items. We've had a request to cancel two action items. One has happened. One is on our May January agenda to approve. We've modified two and approved two uh modifications.
We've transferred six. Five have been granted. One is on our January agenda. So total of 17 changes have been made. Well, the plan completions is in process. 54% of the committees have
submitted their responses. Okay. So, we actually have in year one which ends June 30th 12 completions that should happen. We have an additional 12 for the second year. And those two years are
frozen. That's what they're going to get measured on. Okay, those 24, you can see the other years uh as they go out. Now, we got a three pages of of the individual organization starting on page
nine. And I'm not going to go through this list, but it's for your for your knowledge of what's happening, who signed up for what. that includes pages 9, 10,
and 11. As I mentioned earlier, as we move to page 12, not everybody is enthused or happy with what's what's going on with the master plan. In this particular chart, we'll try to address some of that. We figured
it is about 10% of the organizations that have a negative response. We're taking the stance stay out of our business. We will decide that it's important. About 50% are neutral. They believe in the cause but haven't figured out how to how to get the job done with the staff
they have. And then about 40% are very positive, enthused, and they will get the job done. They cannot wait to help this the town grow. To address some of those facts, we put together the rest of this slide.
Empic estimates that between four and 5,000 man hours were put into developing the master plan. That included the 36 plus meetings that that the EMPAC had.
includes the 35 minute survey, 40 questions that 900 residents responded to, 12 well well attended public workshops. There were two consultants, one paid, one volunteered,
and several members of the mass advisory committee read the book urban planning for dummies. Because of this major town commitment, Empic feels that each action item at least deserves a fair and honest review. Not that we think everyone will should
be done, it just needs a review. Your support in changing these negative attitudes to positive will be greatly appreciated. Here is a list of the 12 action items that are scheduled to be completed by 6:30
with a simplified description. I do not intend to go through each of those. That is for your learning if you care to read it. That's pages 13 and 14. That takes us to 15, which is what's happening in the future.
We need to finish collecting the completion promises from the 11 organizations that had been missing. Once they're in, we will achieve completion of goal of 12 plus action items.
We intend to make work with every organization so that they get a green rating. We encourage order and we're we're we're changing our emphasis on this. We're encouraging more and more modification to enhance the impact of the actions,
remove some of the clutter that's in the action items, make it more impactful for your organizations. We hope to begin to assist lead organizations in research and action item completions.
We need to continue to accept, review, and rule on master plan changes. We're going to organize year three promise completions. Grow the committee back to five. It's been a little difficult losing two key
members when you're in a liaison approach. Each of the three members have about eight committees that they're liaisoning with right now. Continue benchmarking, evaluate possible process improvements
with the other towns in the state, do our two presentations that we owe to the select board and the planning board. Continue strong leaison approach with all town departments and begin joint meetings with committees that need a
nudge or a push. review our impact charter to make sure we're on track and grow our outre out outreach communication to asssure continued public taxpayer input. And that is our update. Glad to answer
any questions or take on any comments. >> Norm I had two questions. >> Yes, Mark. Will there be uh something in the town the annual town report related to uh >> Absolutely. >> Yep.
>> The other one is are are you putting in for any kind of budget >> coming up? This is an item we have not discussed the need for additional funds, but I'll put that on our January agenda. And I'll compliment you. You are so
organized. Your skills are amazing. >> I'll second that. Tell them that all the time. >> Appreciate your work. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, I I'll third it, I guess.
[laughter] Um, you have this organized and put well together. I appreciate the quick but thorough review and I think it's really illuminating to all the work that both this group the Mic has done and also the impact and really how much
effort went into that and I appreciate the effort in spite of push back. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Comments? >> Um no I mean there's a lot of work that's gone on here.
taken in most of the meek meetings and uh you guys are very thorough and deliberate. The only if I could advice is some of the the one that caught my eye the most was the last water commissioner's meeting
and that meeting was I thought to be honest much more adversarial than it needed to be. >> I didn't see it. I >> I'd urge anyone to take a look at it because it was it was an interesting meeting. Um, and you know, part of it is taking some
of the survey data and quotes from the survey and the frankly the water commissioners have some pretty decent facts behind them around how we got where we are and where we are with certain things, what the contents of our water look like,
certain bumps in the road that they've had happen with Springfield water and chlorination, things of way beyond what I know off the top of my head and there was a lot of history there as well. So a lot of some of the survey responses were just that and should be
taken from the point of view of how would you look at this and and I think in in the end when that whole meeting circled back there was a real need for some education outward education from the water and from the town
[clears throat] as to why do we have certain things the way they are? Why is there what is a you know what is a withdrawal permit? What is why is that? You know, maybe you even have to explain, you know, I don't want to go into a lot of detail here, but maybe you need to
explain some of the politics of water, if you will. This isn't done at the local level. This is being dominated out of Boston, right? and your withdrawal permit and how much water you can do and what the relation is to the Westfield River and a lot of nonsensical things
that are coming out of Boston that are driving actual things that happen in the town of Southwick. And if someone wants to champion at the state level on to drive those things properly, you know, West Springfield has their wells here in in the town of Southwick. We don't sell them water. They bought land in
Southwick, put in a well. There was lawsuits and everything else going back dozens of years. They have a different withdrawal permit than we do even though they've got their straw in the same pond that we do, right? Is it fair? No. Is it the fault
of the water commissioners? No. And you know, so some of this and I think some of the other items in the master plan, a lot of it are very achievable, very doable, and there also needs to be some outreach to say, look, a lot of this stuff is already here. And the other point that
I'd like to make and I I made it to this board a couple of weeks ago and by the way I I'll take full blame. I am the human rain delay on why the select board line is bud and I will have that completed. But the other part that I thought um and I I had talked to Marcus
during the impact cuz I had seen it in action even while we were still in before the master plan was done. almost every board and commission has been taking some of the the feedback and input and and discussions that were
coming out of EMPAC and had them frame some of their discussion or some of their decision-making process. And I think that's wonderful for the most part. And so and and I I'll speak for myself here on this board in light of things that come in front of this board
within our purview. I've been very mindful of the things that have come out of the master plan, whether it was discussions during the master plan or things that actually got written into the master plan kind of as a guiding principle or a guiding light to give me guidance as to my decision-making
process. So, that's my commentary, but thank you for all you do. I just I would just say to be take some of that use that water commission meeting as kind of an experience as to how to go about winning
versus maybe it it I think it was a very argumentative meeting to start with and in the end you guys were all kind of coming around to the same place. Um and that might be just something to take into account as you approach other boards and commission. >> That was the plan. >> Well then you you you nailed it.
[laughter] I I agree. It started off a little rough, but in the end the the end result was everyone was in agreement that education was the goal and and we've talked about it. There's a lot of uh you
called it clutter in some of those recommendations and that's what I've been trying to stress to you guys is to break those apart, shed what recognize and acknowledge and put the education out there. this is already done.
Those people who did the survey are not aware of it. We need to tell them the things they want exist. May not be perfect, but it exists. And then everything else that's left are the things we really need to address. And and outreach is one of the key things
that is throughout that master plan, education and outreach. So, um, is there anything else you'd like to see from me in their next report, the next report to these boards is different than what's going to be in the annual report? Is
there anything you'd like to see the next time or hear about specifically? I think just backup to this would be to, you know, once you're past year one, you don't have to go through it in this presentation, but in the backup to this is what are those completed objectives
that are done, right? So that we've got a record of what they are and can all and and or if we didn't make it, what those are that still need need work. Um that would be my suggestion. You know, it doesn't have to be part and parcel of a 4-hour presentation here, but you
know, sometimes you have in the back of a preso is just backup. these are the items that are completed and who did them and >> not. And I certainly encourage >> I would love to see that that board built back up to its full strength, right? So, you know, and um
>> as is as it goes in in just about every board and commission that we have. um you know struggling to maintain a full complement of members is is a challenge and we you know if anyone's watching this tonight that wants to be on the mic um you know reach out we'd love to have
a conversation about that because you know having you know the the last line too is you know part of this is um you know grow our outreach communications continued public taxpayer input but we want input from you know also business owners and people that you know operate and run businesses in our town because
they're a key compon component of of what we do, >> right? Uh no, not necessarily. Maybe they might, you know, you never know, right? But um so, you know, I definitely would love to see, you know, that that board flushed out and also folks looking
at it also more outside. Sometimes we get all consumed with process and we have to do this and we know some of the inside baseball piece of how how certain things operate, but have someone come in kind of ask a question that's going to turn a light bulb on go didn't think of
it that way because we've always done something this way or what have you. >> Okay. >> Anything else? >> No, I mean I coming into a little late here so I'm trying to catch up. Um, we know we've I've had my comments in the past, some of them justified, some of
them not. Um, I think the biggest thing that I see is now as we're communicating more, I think it was just the rub that there was a lot of things that went to paper that people took as well, we already do that and now that's as the
communication builds, those are those are coming up as completions or completions for this year, I think. I think that I think actually you're going to have a lot more completions than what you have listed because I think there's a lot of things that are 90% in the works that just need a little finishing.
>> Um that if we can communicate and come from where we're all coming from on it, I think I think that'll help a lot. But I think the initial wave there was so much information. There was a lot of departments that said I already do this, I already do that or I don't have time
to do this. So I think even though you gave it an A+ effort of communicating, there was just so much information because you did your job so well that it was an overload. So I think it'll filter out. I think it'll shake out and I think we'll end up with a broad stroke that um
is a good direction. >> I think that's why the liaison approach is key because we're able to go down and one-on-one with those groups and break it down. We know you do this. That's what we want to report. you're already 90% there.
>> Let's focus on like like I try >> and some of it you just have to simple because it's a moving target all the time from >> all the different departments >> and that it's flexible. I mean it's it's a moving it is a moving thing. It's very flexible. >> But thank you. I know there's
so >> anything else from me >> master plan implementation committee >> for those that don't know what means. >> Okay. All good. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you very much. >> Okay. >> Excuse me.
>> Don't we have to stick around or do you not want me up? >> No. Well, you want to Oh, you don't You're going to close yours? >> You're going to close yours again. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Make a motion to close the MIT meeting. >> Dave Spina. So moved.
>> Second. >> Roll call vote. D >> I. So, MIT has officially closed its meeting at 6:33. >> Don't go by that. >> Yes.
>> All right. Thank you. >> Very welcome. >> Okay. And then the planning board has a request for the select board for a public hearing for large scale >> potential.
total voltaic system installations in the pertinent structures i.e. battery energy storage systems give us a quick quick rundown or for those that aren't already in the know. Uh the planning board was in receipt of
concerns from members of the public and other volunteer and elected officials throughout town. Um in concern about the potential for the town of Southwick to become overwhelmed by applications for
largecale solar and battery energy storage systems or the battery systems that usually come alongside those large solar fields. Um this awareness by the public has been heightened due to the application over
in Westfield. Since then town has uh town property has been purchased by electric companies. So we have to keep an eye on the fact that it might already people are already kind of eyeing us. Other communities have put a moratorum in the interim on these
types of developments either because the towns themselves didn't have any bylaws in place um or also to wait for state guidance to come down on these since it is a hot topic not just here in western Massachusetts but throughout the state.
Um, the planning board discussed this and agreed that it would be in the town's best interest to open a public hearing for us to hear from the public and officials on whether or not the board would recommend that we put in
place a moratorum on these applications until a date in the future. We anticipate a date right after next, not this coming year's annual town meeting, but the one following that will allow the planning board time to finish our
general chapter 185 bylaw update that is due to be completed at this coming year's annual town meeting. um as well as give the state time to issue their guidance and limitations on what sorts of parameters local
constituencies can put in their bylaws to protect the land here. I think that's as complete as I can get it. >> It's pretty complete. Um
I guess one question I have is why are I understand the the thought of a moratorium and I understand more thought of a hearing about it but why are we only talking about battery storage why are we not talking about all generation whether it be smallcale nuclear whether
it be oil generators all the above >> that would be a whole another level of discussion currently the state of Massachusetts and it's from my understanding that chapter 185 operates that if it's not an allowed use
can't do it here. So I don't think we currently have nuclear facilities listed anyone anywhere in our chapter 185 bylaws but we do have large and small scare solar and their permanent structures. So those accessory structures are getting bigger, getting
larger and that is where some of the more focused concern has been because we don't have those large battery storage systems um listed, identified um and defined within our current bylaw. We can't just say a moratorum on those. We
have to include the large scale solar as part of that language. But again, that could all change. We could have a public hearing on this and we could hear from the public and that nope, we are not we do not need to worry about it. We are happy with our current bylaws. Don't see
any need for it. And then, you know, the planning board would probably vote in accordance with that. Um but we think in the fact that we have handled a couple of these applications recently where the increasing size of the accessory battery
storage units that accompany the large scale solar that we already have is where our experts and our officials are starting to get a little fuzzy and wanting to make sure that we don't not include the right safety precautions
for those types units here. Additionally, currently where the allowed uses are for large scale solar really focuses on our industrial zoning, which is right above our aquifer and adjacent to a lot of our protected wetlands. So, while there are minimum
rules and distances that conservation has for those sorts of things, is that enough for us for this particular use? And do we want that in writing? I think we do before an application actually comes before us. Currently, we're asking
for applicants to provide an extended concrete pad to protect the ground from a potential leak, but that's not written in our bylaw that we require that and we don't want to run into that problem in the future. >> Can't some of that be covered under the fire chief's authority having
jurisdiction on some of this? >> I don't think so. And I think the public hearing would give us that opportunity to hear directly from the fire chief and have current updates of what's happening at the state level because it's coming down not just in building code but in
fire code and as well as you know so there's a lot of different moving pieces and in the interim so that we're not left exposed. We think this might be the best answer. And again, it's not the goal isn't to
completely bar solar in the town of Southwick. That's not the goal. We're not anti-solar, anti-renewable energy. We're not attempting to act in a reactionary manner. We're not doing it out of fear. We're doing it, I think, out of proper caution and wanting to
make sure that our bylaws are up to date and protect our resources as best as possible. >> No, I think it's a good idea. I mean, I I wish there was a way a better way to look at you. We already have the large
ground mounted solar bylaw in place and I get that these are kind of accessory uses to that. Um, and we already have a process for that. But, um, it would be it's going to be interesting to see the public comment. I
know I've gotten emails from from folks. I know Dan Ally who was a a staunch opponent of the the facility in in uh Westfield um I let him know that you know this is probably coming back to the planning board for public hearing would love to have his input and and counsel on that
um and others right that pro and against right as to how that how these things work and how they don't work or when they fail how they fail um and go through the process and you know the other thing just reading some of the
some of the stuff that's been out there is there's not one single thing that's driving us to this or driving the planning board to this at this moment. Right. There's not this. So there's not an application in the wings. No one's been dealing with anybody.
>> This is kind of being proactive to try to >> correct >> get in front of this, right? Rather than having to be reactive and >> then what do you do? So um from that I appreciate it and I you know I appreciate the sending it this way now we can send it
back to you guys to go through that process and have that open discussion in a forum. So >> but was there talk of special or from the annual what's the goal? I think if the result of a public
hearing is that the town's people are looking for a moratorum to go into effect, we would do our due diligence and best to get it onto the special. >> If it was practical, it's >> you know, it it may not be practical. >> It's already written and they just need
to have the public hearings. >> This is the outcome isn't guaranteed. There might be an overwhelming number of public comments and I wouldn't dare close a hearing. I'm I'm much open to being deliberative about it. I would
hope that if it is the outcome that we want to see that you know we do because 6 months is a large amount of time for somebody to put in an application be before something happens before bylaws get more stringent. Um so
>> and was there a a metric on the what is large? it's a thousand square feet or more. That's already in our bylaw. So, this would not prevent um somebody from coming in and applying to put one in their backyard. You know, typical
residential usage, they come in for that. That would not prevent your regular everyday Joe from coming in for that. >> Again, if it were, >> right, >> you know, so this is this isn't a vote or a discussion to make it happen. And this is to allow us to even have the
discussion to decide whether or not we would advise the town to vote to put moratorum. >> And I' I'd urge you to reach out to town council too because I don't want to I don't even want to guess but there we've had this in the past. I think Marcus
will recall the dates are important. So data publication of a public hearing regarding a potential this or that is has implications to an application filed. So it it's not like you have to get to town meeting, get it passed, get
it past the attorney general before that bylaw is in proper effect as far as it its impact on potential applications. I don't know what those timelines are. >> If you know, that's great. I don't know, but um that would be relevant.
you know, and Sure. >> I did reach out to Mark Beglane of Baker Wilson last week. I have not heard anything else yet. >> Good. You know, because, you know, and just in, you know, I I know that there was some angst on on my response to this
last week, but there was on an amended agenda to this board and an amendment to the amendment that we I hadn't seen coming into the meeting. So, I'm sitting here and this comes up and and having served 15 years on the planning board prior to to being elected to the select board. Traditionally, a request for a
public hearing for a zoning bylaw change came from the planning board to the select board who sent it back to the planning board for a hearing. And there I don't know that there was an impetus or or an appetite because we had not ever discussed it on this board as a
board to say well this is the select board saying you know we really want to tell that planning board to open a public hearing for a zoning change bylaw because this is something that we see as a problem. If and if that communication got disjointed well then directed at at
the board here. [clears throat] But the proper thing was for the the planning board to discuss that, decide that that's something that they want to champion. And with the with our support, I certainly will go and I'm take in those meetings and take them in. >> Well, like you had said before, was
there a trigger or something like that, an application that brought this forward? That could be anything. It could be something generated by the planning board itself. It could be a particular application. It could be a petition from a resident. Yep.
>> We thought it was >> coming from the select board looking out for the town correct in toba, >> but that's okay. We're >> Yeah, we absolutely are. It just we the way it was the way it came up during a meeting last week with very little
notice and very little discussion by by this board and you guys had discussed it albeit briefly at the end of your last meeting prior was okay, we should I thought it's the proper way to handle it. So >> here we are. >> Here we are.
>> Would this include battery systems not attached to a voltaic system standalone? >> No, because they're not defined as such within our you know we don't have battery energy storage systems as an independently defined. So
>> they couldn't they couldn't be allowed, >> right? Right now it's not it's right now that's just accessory uses for solar. So, and I don't know enough to know if there would be an application for just a bunch of batteries with nothing generating next to it.
>> This is where we need the experts. >> So, I am in favor of this and in favor of being proactive in exactly as you said, protecting the resources that we cherish, that we need. Um,
so, >> so I make I gladly make a motion to send this back to the planning board to hold a public hearing on this issue. >> A second. >> Roll call vote. Dang. >> Doug Moin. Yes. >> Anderson. Yes. >> Great. Okay. So, we will be doing that
next week. We invite the public to come to our meeting on December 16th if you have questions, concerns or endorsing opinions on the idea of the large scale solar moratorum. >> The notice of public hearing was already
>> already been posted. >> Okay. Yeah. Thank you. >> And I will take a motion to close the joint meeting of the planning board and report >> your second. Marcus Phelps second. >> Call vote. Jessica Thornton. I
>> I Marcus Phelps I. >> Diane Jesus I. >> Thank you Diane. >> Thank you Diane. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Take care. >> Enjoy the rest of your meeting. >> Thank you. >> Enjoy your basketball practice.
>> All right. Then we are moving on to fiscal 26 tax classification hearing. Mr. Austin, I saw him come back in. >> Hey, that's it. >> Sure. You want to You're here. You want
to come up join us? >> Don't worry about it. Fantastic. >> Good to see you. Good to see you, Mr. How you doing? Uh, you're not on the agenda specifically, so just introduce yourselves. >> Uh, John Kang, chairman of board of assessors, 15 McCory Drive.
>> Bill Brown, board of assessors. >> Randall Austin, director of assessing. >> Which guy? >> Um, I had a PowerPoint presentation. >> Is it nailed it? So, this is hastily prepared because we
only just got our classification uh final or not classification but our final approval from do to proceed um late this afternoon. So, I had talked previously about having uh a nice presentation with a lot of other information and comparisons to other
towns, but uh I did what I could and I did even just update some of what was there last year. >> Okay. >> And so, if we could go to the next slide. And so yes, per master laws uh chapter 4 section 56 we're we're having this
hearing allows a shift in the tax rate in the burden between the classes. It doesn't uh change the total levy for the community. It just determines what amount is going to be borne by each class. Um there's some information here about
shifting the burden. We'll basically figure out what a a residential factor would be. uh uh the minimum residential factor uh and we can determine where we're going to split it if that was what we wanted to do. We don't have to go as
much as the 1.5 that's the maximum. Uh you could do less and then uh it would be you know a closer uh a closer ratio between the two amounts. Um I think uh it's basically for every dollar that you
save the residents it would put $3 onto every tax bill or the commercial. So, um, historically, I didn't do a lot of preparation for this because historically we've, uh, had a single rate and I didn't hear any, um,
questions about splitting the tax rate. But we can certainly have more information on it if we need it or if in the future it becomes uh, you know, a topic of discussion, I can provide more information.
And so um yeah just an over overview of the revaluation and the tax classification process and this is a revaluation year [clears throat] are every five years and uh you know so this is the one that means that the department of revenue is going to come in and be closely scrutinizing all the
different things that we're doing and um let me see yeah we're making our adjustments according to fair market value. we need to be within a certain percentage of, you know, within 2% basically of of fair
market value of 100%. And so we're not quite at 100% but we're very close and and right within the acceptable standards and um you know all the different properties are getting uh classified
according to the usage. Are there any questions? >> Not yet. >> Okay. >> Not from me. >> Yeah. is just an overview of of this process that we're going through. And this is the different things that make up our tax rate, the total taxable real and personal property. Um, all the
different things that we have, appropriations, state aid, revenue expenditures, the new growth, debt exclusions, no overrides. So, you know, permits and fees for uh all sorts of different things go into the the budget. The total budget is um 37 million, but
what we're raising with the tax levy is only just over 25 million this year. And so we uh have the different classes of property, residential, commercial, industrial and personal property. And
that are that those are the values that we have right now uh in each one. and then the total at the bottom. And so that was the percentage where we're talking about the percentage u as far as the residential split. You know, if we were going to do a split tax rate,
we really don't have a large enough concentration of commercial and industrial. It's just too small of a percentage because almost, you know, 80 90% is residential. And that doesn't leave much for the the remaining um the remaining classes of property uh as
far as you know filling in the gap. If it was larger than you know then we would think about possibly splitting the tax rate if it was closer to an 85 and 15 uh or even 20%. >> Is that kind of the threshold? 15% is to
look at. >> I' I'd say anywhere between 20 and 25% is the most common. >> Next slide, please. >> And so this is just a pie chart showing that breakdown. And so you can see 89%
uh is the residential and our largest portion where our bedroom community basically. and then some nitty-gritty statistics. And so this is a value comparison on all these different classes of property. Um,
and it's a comparing to what we had last year and and this year and the differences between the two. So the single family homes are 101's and condominiums are 102s and so on and so forth. Commercial start with a three. Uh
industrials start with a four and there's they're more grouped in together. Residential has a little bit of a larger breakdown, but it goes to show, you know, this shows the difference in the um in the percentages or the total value
and percentages and differences from last year to this year. >> What's the vacant or accessory >> accessory land? >> Yes. So that's uh just either developable developable or undevelopable
land. It's vacant land >> but tax. >> Um yes. I also wanted to bring your attention to the 200s there. It says open space and just notice that it's all zero. So that's another thing that we'll be voting on tonight whether we're going to
adopt open space or not. And we don't. And so that's what I'm we don't historically do open space. We handle it in a different way. And uh that's part of it is through chapter uh the chapters that are down at the bottom. And so chapter uh
chapter 61 and um uh agricultural in the forest 61 61A and 61B. That's sort of how we handle our open space as opposed to classifying it in in the 200s. And so if we could go to the next slide. So that was a real
estate comparison. And now this is the personal property value comparison between uh the last year and this year and shows the percentages of increase. And just like on the last the the previous one, it shows the different number of uh that you know the parcel
count and how many we had of each particular uh class of uh personal property. Um, and this would be a good time to say there's more businesses than what's there, but we have that $10,000 uh exempt amount for personal property. And
so, not um, you know, that's just the ones that are qualifying to be taxed. The others are exempt. >> Questions? >> Seeing how we just talked about are or how are solar fields? um well residentially. So
>> the larger >> Yeah. Okay. And so there's uh and we have a couple of pilot agreements that are in place and um then uh one of them uh is owned by a a business and it's providing the power for the business.
>> Um but yeah, usually it's an agreement that's set up >> prior to >> Yeah. prior to that. Yeah, we do have another field that's coming on um right now and that is in progress negotiation of that >> based on the value of the equipment.
>> Um >> yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah, it's part of this the land value and the value of the equipment >> and um there was just an IGRformational guideline release that came out in October of 21 that changed the rules of how it's done. And so in the past you
were entering into a pilot agreement and getting a set payment amount per year. And uh now it's if you enter into that type of agreement, you can't claim that new growth uh when the the value comes on
for the first time. And so um we kind of prefer to handle it differently now and really have it on a as a personal property. >> Yeah. And schedule exactly like that. So thanks SL and then this is the totals
for the fiscal year. So just everything kind of all brought together in one and yeah it includes exempt property also but the residential we don't have open space commercial industrial and personal property all separately
and then if you have go to the next slide I put some information in or try to put some together quickly about the average single family bill. And so I have on here the average single
family value from 22 to 26. And uh I'm showing the tax rate for each year, what the average single family was and what the average bill was. And I'm estimating the tax rate at 1450
for fiscal 2026. And so you can see that we added a lot of value to the average single family. And so we had our uh our project that we had to do and that
resulted in additional value coming on and then I think that's what the result is and why it has gone up so uh so much from the previous year. I think that had a little little to do with it. Do you have an estimate of or a
guesstimate of what the market value adjustment was outside of that project on average? I I could figure that out and I did initially when when I first started looking at the results because I knew how much value was added and it's
saying okay well total residential is this much and then I took that dollar amount out and so I think we're around 10 yeah almost 11 and it really I it was closer to to seven between seven and eight >> I guessed seven I looked at my own and I guess seven
on average for residential. Yeah, if I remember correctly or I could, you know, I couldn't come up with that information because I was thinking about >> I did some backwards math and kind of got there. So, okay. >> Thank you. >> Okay. And so, you know, here's the vote to be
addressed at the 9. There's four things that we're going to vote on and one of them has to do with that open space. Are we going to adopt open space as a class of property? Historically, we do not. And so, um, you know, we we should have, you
know, the official vote or motion that we we're not going to adopt open space. Um, will we adopt a residential exemption? And so, we do not have a residential exemption here. Residential exemption is something that is really, um, it's used in different parts of the
state, even in Boston, but it's when you're really kind of taking a percentage. Um it it's more appropriate. You know, I used to be the assessor in Lennox residential exemption might be more appropriate there because about a third of the single family homes and
condos are second homes. And so you have a large presence of out of town owners than you, you know, um you know, or at the Cape, you know, if you're at the Cape, but you're a year-round resident, you don't want to have to pay the same taxes as someone that is paying, you know, that's not here year round. and
it's a a you know it's a cottage that they're renting and and making all sorts of money off of. You know, it's that's sort of what the residential factor can do. it can offset the amount for for uh local residents, but it doesn't really
apply here because we don't really have a large enough of a lakefront community and second home uh presence um to to make the, you know, to have an adjustment make any difference.
>> That would be like the Airbnbs, all that. Um, >> not that there's a lot if it wasn't your primary residence, right? >> Right. It's Yeah. >> Then you pay a full rate. Is that >> And then that it's Yeah. that you're
going to adopt a certain exemption or amount that the the um you know in town owners would receive and it would be picked up on the other end basically. Um and then also the small commercial exemption. And so that's something also
that we historically have not done. If the business is the valued uh a million dollars or less and has 10 employees or less qualify for this uh you know then they provide this information to us every year a list of all of the businesses in town that would
qualify. But uh a lot of times when the business is that small they're not the owner of the property and so it's a tax break for on the property. And so um and uh you know I again something that doesn't really necessarily apply here.
>> Yeah, it doesn't fit our model exactly but but so then uh the last thing that we'll be voting on is what residential factor will we adopt and I think the board will have a recommendation uh
what that will be. >> Is that the end of your pres? Yes, I think do I have another slide after this? Find out in a second. Nope. >> Okay. So, going back to that one. Um, explain the open space again. We have
open space. We do we we we do not haven't historically adopted open space as uh its own class of >> but our open space is >> is just >> town owned and exempt >> by the residents and not necessarily
exempt but they can get a discount on it by uh participating in the chapter land programs. So some >> otherwise it's in chapter 61 in one of the three categories. So what if we adopted that as a class? What does it do
to the chapter 61? >> Yeah, it's sort of it would be a whole transition that would have to happen. >> What's the implication >> and what's the impact on those land owners? >> Um I'm not sure. It comes it sort of I
think comes more out of their hands and they're not you know um thought of as the the legal owner in in a certain uh case. you know, I really don't have, you know, I don't have all those the answer to that question. I don't want to tell you something wrong, but um I can find
out more information and give you >> more information on that definitely to say yes or no. What is the implication? >> Well, I think so right now um if it's open space that we're considering, you
filed a chapter 61 61 or B, right? B or recreation but not >> for recreation farm >> that that wouldn't be part of open space, right? >> I'm I'm not sure. >> Maybe that's where where over the years going from lots of farmland and then,
you know, CPC trying to preserve some farmland and instead of making that open space of wrapped up parcels, we just said, "Hey, we can just apply for 61B exemption and then just keep, you know, refiling that year after year." So there might be a benefit to
>> not having to file if if it's for recreation then they wouldn't have to file every year perhaps >> but what would their tax rate be is the question for them. >> Right. And I >> am I still going to get whatever the DLS
annual valuation is. >> Right. Right. >> So and then I guess I'd want to know how many of those are in 61B recreation. Mhm. >> And and does it apply only to those what what does happen to the far forest
because some of the forest isn't active forestry but it might be classed that way >> and what that's what's the impact to them and then what's the impact to the rest of the taxpayers if that's the case >> it shifts over to the residential
>> if we so we're basically going to tax open space as we tax everything house. >> Yeah. >> No, that's opposite of what she just said. There's probably a quick explanation. >> Well, no. I mean, it's the open space discount reduces a tax burden on open space, shifting it to the residential
properties, right? >> Like parks, various wildlife habitats, >> but it already does. >> Well, if somebody puts it in 61 their land, right? >> Correct. >> And there's there's like um uh what do
you call it? um reasons for u things you have to meet >> qualify a bas >> 61A all chapter 61 >> and it's an obligation that's paid by the the owner and it sounds like when
it's in 200 it gets uh put you know to the taxpayers as a general thing >> so so what I'm the way I'm hearing this is that >> right now if you have open space you're being taxed on it as res regular residential property Unless
>> you file for the exemption which you have to do every year. >> Correct. >> So the the implication would be that if you miss that filing you pay the full tax rate. However, if we put it in open space then that tax rate is always lower and the burden is
probably seen before those applications come in maybe but could also I'm >> sorry I don't have more info but I've never been in a community that had open space. >> Nobody ever does. There are some out there. Bob, >> you really need that comparison of open space versus chapter 61. What are the
what what are the differences? >> Seen of it's in the it's in there. It's in our gateway. >> Oh, yeah. >> That information is how many recreation, farm, and what's the third forest? >> Yeah. And it was in the one of the um slides that I had. So you might be able
to go back and see it if you you can go actually you go back a couple slides and like one of those view and right there. Yeah. So forest agricultural res >> 18 >> totaling 900,000 of value
>> but I have to I have to know >> but that's in 61 already right? >> Yeah. So that that would be a potential parcel that could be defined as open space >> and you can't have income like 61 you have to have income, right? You have to have to have income. >> Okay. >> Off the land.
>> Yeah. You have to >> a minimum amount per acre. >> But I think where we get into the issue is places that are just like I know there's a property behind me that is zoned open space. It's owned by somebody. It was sold. The developer was able to sell it somehow to somebody who
plan on building there, but it's zoned open space. >> So, because it's zoned open space, you can't build there, but you have to pay the tax on it as a regular property and then come in and apply for that 61 >> fee maybe.
>> Interesting. That's one of my questions is so if we adopted that does that 61 chapter 61 option still exist or does it by default become >> I think what what you put your land into
open space you can't take it back out you know so as far as agricult >> so it's like an APR then >> it's a forced APR >> well I don't know I don't know the implic And it starts to get a little dicey, right? So I don't think we actually have a zone of open space. >> Yeah. >> So,
>> but what it is there is you can have a parcel that was say part of a residential subdivision that was deed open space. There's a conservation restriction that says you can and it's filed and deed. You can never build on that. >> So what is its value? Its value is
immeasurable to the people who live around it that bought in a resident, flexible residential subdivision that are counting on that open space to not develop >> and the town entered into an agreement with that developer to offer smaller lots in
exchange for open space. The open space usually walls off that subdivision so that it can't spider out. But it and generally what happens unless it was actually deed to a homeowners association, it usually falls into tax
title and the town ends up owning it anyway >> and they sold it. >> The town sold it. >> This town sold it three or four years ago at tax title auction for short money and I the guy who bought it thought he could sell it. Was recently listed on Zilla. So, and and you know, and I don't
want to get into there are intricacies to it, but that's the general premise of it and how it was filed and how it was recorded, but just to be clear, we the zoning piece of it is No, you're right. It's it's an o almost an overlay or a deed restriction on that property. So,
but basically if if it its value is greatly diminished from a a valuation standpoint, if you were to look at it with what is its full and um you know full economic value, >> you can't build a house on it because
you're prohibited by that deed. >> Um so that's going to change its value. It has a value. Absolutely. But I don't know how you would as an assessor or anyone else put your finger on it. And >> usually they should in all honesty those should be deed to a homeowners
association that owns and controls and maintains those open spaces. That hasn't always worked out in the town of Southwick from for a variety of reasons and and usually they fall through into tax title or they were never deed in the
first place. they were just deed to >> they were sold as a parcel. >> Yeah. >> But there was like a conservation restriction or something on that land that that's a whole another complicated thing that the planning board will one day have to figure out. Um, but
I just I want to make sure that and from what you're saying is though if if we adopt that and someone misses their 61A filing or 61X filing
that they would have a larger tax bill. But if we classified it as open space, the the the tax >> increased amount would fall then fall on the rest of the taxpayers of the town of Southwick, which >> which it already does. >> It kind of already does because it's in
61A already, right? >> Not automatically. They have to go in and offload that tax burden somehow. So, I think that's probably the best way to for us to do it, you know, to let people come in and file that paperwork, get their exemption, and then >> So, I think we should not adopt that
would be encouraging us not to do that >> and probably why we haven't historically adopted that. >> We're glad we were able to talk that through, >> but I still I'd like to still research that and see the details on it, how it works. And so I'm taking that this is maybe the first time it was discussed
with the select board >> in my recommen previous years it wasn't brought out that class could >> we always we took one singular vote >> okay >> which was the the residential factor >> okay >> y >> so there is just
a little bit more and that is one of the things so >> appreciate it >> and I I also I think I sent you a thing >> oh yeah I saw >> I thought it was very informative on a tangential this this is very much more informative and and very well presented. I appreciate it. Well, I I wish that
there was more info or more to it really, but >> we got a little time to budget season, but yeah, it was kind of a Sorry, as an aside, there was a presentation in Westfield last week at a city council meeting by their assessor, and it it it went into a lot more even more detail
than this, but then it also encompassed the use of free cash to offset the tax rate and what that does to your tax rate in outlying years. It was a very interesting pres. So, I sent it to you all plus the the clerk and the treasurer just to have as something as we head
into budget season. But this kind of touches on a lot of the same topics as well. >> So, for part two and three, I need to research those as well, the residential and the small commercial exemption. >> I just have to say that this vote has to
be taken by December 31st or we don't have a tax rate. >> Yes. It's really >> this year I think as far as the open space my recommendation as chairman and we haven't really discussed it much further either is that the open space obviously needs more you know more research more information so I think
that we can put off till next year. The residential exemption we talked about it we don't have a surplus of vacation homes here. So there's not going to be a huge offset for the regular residential taxpayer. it it it just shifts the burden a little bit to the higher value
homes. The higher value homes would pay a little bit more and the lower value homes get a little bit of a discount and so there's a break even point and >> how do we know how many are second homes? So okay so I the way I understood it was that it was primary residence or
second not valuation of >> correct it's it's not it's your secondary home right not your primary residence what is considered your doicile and so historically we do not have second homes here I know there are some and that was asked about during our
revaluation process and I have uh Kim going through and looking at a list and so it's something that we're going to throw out a you know we for personal property we'll send out a form of list for commercial uh entities, but also we should be doing it for second homes if
we have enough. If we had four or five, then we don't have enough to make it worth our while. And especially with the $10,000 exempt amount, too. Um that that could also be why we're not uh enforcing it even though we might have some, but we're doing a study basically to see how
many second homes do we have. And then with that $10,000 threshold, it would it be worth our while to do that. And so how do we do it? We send out these forms of list, the 2HF, and that means it's not the same one a commercial business
is going to receive, but it's for a home. And it's up to the owners to provide us with a a detailed contents of the home and the value of the contents. And as you can imagine, some responses are going to be better than others. You take the good ones that are the best
ones that you have and figure out a basically a percentage of the building value that you're going to apply universally for the amount of uh personal property for the second home. And so depending on what that is, you know, and the percentage that you use,
like anywhere from 3 to 6% I've seen in the past. And so is that under $10,000? Well, then, you know, it's a lot of exercise for nothing. But it is something that we're looking into and trying to address because it was brought up and something that the Department of Revenue asked us about as we were going
through the reval process. So, um, we're not done because we're going through, you know, thousands or of, uh, properties to determine this, but it is something that if we have enough results, then we're going to >> So, it's not really something we can know this year.
>> Correct. I don't think I think the first three we can really vote on this year. I think those are >> That's what I That's what I'm getting to. Yeah. >> Because the same thing with the small commercial exemption. Like we had said, most of those small businesses don't own the the building. So, you know, you going to Grisell Plaza, all these little
businesses. Yeah, that'd be great if we could give them some type of exemption, >> but the way we're doing that is by keeping that single tax rate. So, those little businesses are >> correct. >> Taking the burden out of that larger Gotcha. >> Yep. So, that was going to be my recommendation is that we
would not adopt those first three, but do the study. >> Yeah. For future. Yeah. And one of them's already in progress. Okay. And I can get you more information on the other two. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Because the last community when I that I was in, they were talking about
the residential exemption and there's an affordable housing exemption and they thought between the two that they could make a difference, but it really it is not appropriate for that community and I don't think it would really be appropriate here. You have to have a large presence of larger value homes and
really kind of out of town homeowners and um you know that that's that's what you get. So, what percentage of people, you know, and that's what it is. It's for the the benefit of the people that are there that are still local. And I I'm thinking, you know, uh I have an uncle that uh lives up in blood,
Vermont, and they have Okimo there, you know, and he told me it's 7% of people live there year round and the res just, you know, people from out of town and so something like that. Okay, that's what you're doing. you put putting that residential exemption in to benefit that
the people that are here year round and that that are living here the year round and and that's really the basis of the >> okay >> residential exemption but you know uh we can talk about that and next year I'm going to recommend that I come up and
and have a meeting with you guys prior to see what other questions that you have and even anything that might come out of the classification hearing or other process that you're looking for information so that we're prepared and we've already given that. >> Well, I would ask when you when you get this work pretty much done, not wait
until this time next year when you get it done, let us know what the results are. >> Oh, yeah. Okay. So, we can think about it in the long range as well. >> And still, I would like to just touch base just in case anything else has come up. You know, this solar thing now it's a bigger uh situation and you need more
information on whatever topic and uh we can get that to you so that you're thinking about it in September. um and and you know already have been exposed to it instead of like a last second thing like some of these things are now. >> Did you have any other questions on the first three?
>> I do. >> Okay. So you're recommending what for the residential factor? >> We're recommending factor of one. So, it's a single rate for the reasons that we expressed before that, you know, giving that commercial reduction isn't going to reduce the tax burden on the
homeowners as much as we would like to to, you know, in that in that goal. So, would if you if you take if you double the tax rate for commercial, you're only going to gain another million dollars out of 24 million that we're trying to raise. And then then you're pushing these
businesses to find other options and things, especially because we have a lot of small people in town. Yeah. I have no other questions. >> Yeah, one more thing about we have small business businesses but also the larger businesses are mostly here to support the town's people. So I think that's you
know we talk about corporations and stuff most corporations in town are here either supporting providing services or jobs to the residents. >> Yep. >> Okay. So, OMG is looking for a motion on the first on all of them. Or you want to do
four separate votes >> for clarity. I would do four separate votes. >> Okay. Uh first I'll make a motion that we adopt the residential factor of one. >> Second. >> Roll call vote. Dangi. >> Doug Mglin. Yes. >> Anderson. Yes.
>> I will make a motion that we do not adopt an open space adopt open space as a class of property. >> Roll call vote. Diane Gail. I >> Doug Mglin. Yes. >> Sanderson. Yes. >> I'll make a motion that we do not adopt
a residential exemption. >> Second. >> Roll call vote. Dang. I. >> Doug Mglin. Yes. >> Sanderson. Yes. >> And lastly, I will make a motion that we will not adopt a small commercial exemption. >> Second. >> Roll call vote. Dang. I >> Doug Mglin. Yes.
>> Sanders. >> Okay. And we look forward to the results of these studies and more information. And you can if you can point us to the um descriptions or the classifications on
these other three, we'll do do some of our own research on it. >> Sure. >> Not put the burden on you guys to explain it. >> Yeah. and and and once you get past the the residential valuation piece and the property valuation piece like in January like to have a further discussion on the
solar piece you know when um I was not on this board when the first solar projects came in I was on a different board but there was discussion around how those were going to be taxed how they were going to even pull a building permit
which should have been in in my opinion it should have been done by square foot. Just like a building permit, you're going to put up a 30,000 foot building. You pull a building permit and your building permit price is based on the square footage. These are done differently now. Same thing goes for the
tax classification of same and how you tax that property. These pilots became a thing. I'm not sure how we got from you tax them at their value versus then you have a pilot. It's probably worth a discussion to look at that
>> and the the pilot is payment in lie of tax. >> Correct. >> Yes. >> Right. But it's it's not >> they're not always identical, right? Their pilot is not, you know, this is what would have been my Oh, yeah. I appreciate that. You know, but a tax is not always if you had had a tax rate and it was this and that's the taxes on it
>> and here's the pilot, they they don't drive. >> Oh, no. Well, the utility company has a lot more brain power put going at it than correct, you know, and they're a lot faster. That's >> But we don't have to provide. We don't have to give a pilot. >> Correct. >> I don't I don't know if there was state law or anything that came in.
>> Not anymore. >> Yeah. >> We're doing it differently now. >> Yeah. >> They are being taxed. When they first came out, which was probably I, you know, I was doing it too in one of my towns. Um, you couldn't tax them, which is why you had to come up with a pilot. And it was very diff difficult. I mean,
when it's something's new, it's hard >> to figure it out. were saying, "Oh, we like said the IGR from 21 what our burden is going to be for, you know, so that we can forecast our business model or whatever, you know, their excuse was at the time basically of how to, you know, get it set up." And then that was
just a common thing. Um, but yeah, there's a lot of moving factors and that's why it got redone in 2021. And um, I can pass along the the IGR from that. >> I'd appreciate it >> right in my folder. Okay. my solar folder.
>> Could you send us the PowerPoint to >> Sure. See some of those breakouts. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Right. >> $1.8 billion valuation. It's amazing. >> Yeah. And 10 years ago it was sub I mean
substantially lower almost like 30% 40% lower. I remember when it went over a billion and then it there was the market corrected and it went under a billion again maybe into the 900 millions but it's doubled since then. Yeah. And probably since I've been on this board
so it's quite a run for that, you know, and it it's going to change the >> it you're going to see it in the budgeting process, right? But it really is going to drive the tax rate because it's that that one piece of the algebra, right? You've got your budget, you have
your valuations, you have your receipts, but then you you figure out, okay, we need to raise and appropriate this much based on the budget drives the tax rate. There was and I know we were kibson the other day when we were looking through some of the numbers. One of the valuation there was one of the valuations that moved quite a bit.
Probably a home being completed or stuff like that, it would have been enough to move the tax rate. everything else being equal, that one property valuation would have changed that lowered the tax rate for the if that property had come in earlier, right? So, it's going to be interesting to see when we get, you
know, the budget. Obviously, we're going to be very, very careful with the budget as we are every year. You're limited by um you know, we've always been very prudent and fiscally responsible there. There's other safeguards in place, but it's just going to a higher valuation is
going to drive that tax rate in lower, right? we still have to very much do our job and keep that budget in check, but when you have a higher valuation, it drives that that that budget uh the tax rate lower and lower. >> And if I could just really quick say um
you know, as far as South goes in the budgeting, I there's a neighboring community that has about an $80 million budget and they left a million and a half on the table last year. We have a essentially $15 million budget when we take the schools away. We left a million
and a half. So I think that we are very prudent and very fiscally responsible when it comes to budgeting. We don't we're not we don't go over we take less than we need honestly. Um and I think the town is doing a fantastic job in being responsible fiscally as opposed to
you know what some people may say that we're wasting uh the town's money. But I don't think that we are. I think we're doing a great job with keeping it manageable >> and that's why the tax rate went down. So >> it went down a lot. >> Yeah. Over a dollar. So
>> right >> 1557 and now >> 100%. But the proof's in the budget because I I know there was in another neighboring community uh someone was running for re-election on the premise that they lowered the tax rate. Oh yeah. >> But the budget went up 7% just the
valuations went up that much more. That's un that that's that's >> failing 10th grade algebra, right? >> Your budget is what drives everything. The tax rate is the byproduct. The valuation is set by the state. The tax rate, you got to do your job on the We
have to do our job on the budget. >> Yes. >> And town meeting has to do their job on the budget and then the tax rate basically gets set off of that, right? Because it's just the divisor. So >> the valuations essentially equal the playing field of everybody's properties >> and then
>> what they take is what they >> right >> what we pay >> but that's a you know that 1.8 billion and now I said I ruined I ruined it for everyone else but ask someone ask your neighbor ask a friend ask the guy next to you at a restaurant hey what do you think the total valuation is of property
in the town of Southwick very few people have any idea that it's that that it it is $1.8 8 billion. So, and like I said, I was mildly surprised that it was that high cuz I remember when it was, you know, when it
crossed a billion for last year was 1.5. >> Yeah, I get it. It's just, you know, it's still amazing. Yeah. When we saw that number, right, it was still a big number and it had gone up. It's gone up several years. The market's been hot. And also the thing we also take into account here too is
>> the valuation piece of it is lags two years, right? the market. These are 2024ish values, right? >> Right. So established off of sales that took place in 2020. >> Correct. >> For fiscal 26, right? Two years removed from the fiscal year.
>> Thank you. Appreciate all your hard work on this. Thank you. And I think I saw Jason had joined for a while. >> Uh I think a form for us to sign uh be the LA funded. Oh,
>> not sure if we do that or if we need to do the signatures electronically, but >> I feel like it's electronic >> through gateway. Yeah. >> Well, you may be. Okay. >> All right. Thank you.
>> Okay. Moving on to That was informative. >> Yep. >> Moving on to new business. um dispense a warrant article request for the January special town meeting which will again be January 13, 2026
uh from DPW regarding employment of outside consultants. Was Rich with us tonight. >> Huh? >> John was I think >> John was John >> maybe on a different topic. Um, basically this was from Rich Bozac
looking for a motion to put this article on the town warrant for the special town meeting. It's a minor modification to add a reference to the storm water chapter um for the use of outside consultant or peer review and or peer review which al
already exists in 185. Um, >> yeah, for some reason storm water was taken out of zoning. So just to incorporate the uh peer review into storm water they want to add that >> so that's just a that's our bylaw not a it's not a zoning bylaw >> electronic >> correct
>> they used to ask >> chapter 96-1 authority to retain >> it says mayor >> well we'll figure that out they don't have to sign anything >> it's on page five and six of your packet if you want to jump to that >> I'm going to send it to legal this is my
First, this is today was the first time I saw it. So, >> what this by? Yeah. >> Okay. Uh, he just wants to add to say chapters 183 and or 185 of the code of the town of Southwick. >> I have no objection.
>> We have to vote on that, right? to send it to the >> It's gonna be our warrant. It's our warrant article, right? >> Yeah. You don't have to vote on it. >> We don't. Okay. >> No, we're going to put it We'll put it together and you vote on them. >> Yeah. When we have the article, we just put it vote to put it on the >> warrant. All right. >> When does the warrant close for the
>> We don't No, that's I have to uh get with Celeste and Christie. They have the dates tomorrow. I'm meeting. >> I'm going to wager that that was 5 days ago according to Christie. >> What do you mean? No. >> With the meetings what? January 13. >> Yeah. You don't you can close the warrant up until
>> No, I don't mean I if she had her brothers I'm just I'm not put I'm not >> If she had her brothers it would have been closed a month before a meeting but um we should probably expedite on that if we can. >> Yeah. >> And maybe even if we have it ready we
can [clears throat] close the meeting at the at our next meeting. >> If it's ready. Yeah. Okay. So no objections there. Russ. Good. Okay. Um, then we have Kaen on. I saw her. They're waiting patiently. Sorry about
that, Kaen. >> Don't worry about it. >> She had a first. >> I hope you got as much out of the pirate discussions as we did. >> Got a headache. I can tell. >> I'm learning. >> All right. So, you want us to accept the grants of three air sensors for air
quality? >> Yep. So, I can talk about it a little bit. Um, I know it's pretty new. We awarded the mass D air sensor grant on December 1st. So we have 30 days to accept the grant if we want to do it. Um
so it is three purple flex air sensors and these will help the town of Southwick kind of gain more knowledge on known the air quality in Southwick. Uh specifically any particulate matter, any pollutants in the air. Um the health department really thinks that this will
be extremely helpful in the means of education working with the town kind of looking where we can help known air pollutants. Um I've been talking a lot with the Southwick town oh sorry not the town nurse the um school district nurse Ashley the head nurse there. They are
seeing a lot of kids with asthma. They have a lot of asthma action plans and I am trying to look into why that is. So, I think these air sensors will help us collect some data, understand why, um, and hopefully help if possible. Um, so the proposed areas are going to be one
at Southwick Town Hall, one at the town library, and one at one of the schools. So, either my hope is the high school, but it also might be at the elementary school. Um, and I've talked with maintenance at both the town hall and the school system, and they both are in support of it, as well as the DPW
director. Um, they've all been very helpful and they think it's a good idea. So, I just wanted approval from you guys first before uh we went forward with it. >> And these are outside sensors outdoor.
>> Yep. So, they need Wi-Fi and electricity. So, that's why we were a little bit limited in where we could put them up. >> Does the grant pay for the Wi-Fi and the the electricity or is that something we absorb? >> It's something the town absorbs.
Um, I'm happy to, you know, look into if the grant we get with the, um, shared service agreement can pay for it. Um, but I'm not totally sure if they will approve that. >> And where are they just mounted outside like on a wall or something?
>> Yep. So, usually right by a door or um, the school is looking if they can put it on the roof. Um, which I'm I'm I don't want it to be a huge hassle for the school um, for anybody involved. I'm I'm really hoping that these can be easily put up. Um they don't need to be
high up. They don't need >> They're not big. >> No, they're small. >> What? They need Wi-Fi or they're cellular or what? >> They need Wi-Fi. Yes. >> So, I was hoping that we could spread them out a little bit better than having them all clustered right around the center.
>> That was my maybe DPW, which that's pretty far north. And then >> maybe we could talk to our friends at Big Y or something like that for South >> one at the library and one at the school are going to give you the same
everything. >> So I was hoping I talked with DPW so they're they're interested in maybe putting one up there. So we can put any of the three awarded ones anywhere in Southwick. So I can talk with Big Y. Um that's a good point. Um but the Wi-Fi
kind of limits us. So >> electric >> transfer station workers. It too >> there's just so much equipment moving around there too. It might skew >> and dust and stuff. >> Well, I I think I certainly am in favor of accepting them. I think we should
just then figure maybe just have a broader conversation about where to put them that they would get used. I was just looking real quick because I think Westfield actually has a map that they kind of have circles on that show air quality and it varies greatly throughout. Now, Westfield is a much
larger city than us, but they have >> varied air quality throughout the town. >> Yeah, definitely. And >> I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> Um, definitely we're going to see quite a varying uh pollutants, especially because we're so close to Springfield.
Springfield seeing some of the worst air quality it's seen in years um as well as adverse health effects from known pollutants. So, I'm very interested to see, you know, I'm I'm going to try to expand where we put these air sensors because I think that's a great point. Um you know, what what is the air quality
looking like >> and and just and it's purely anecdotal, but we have [clears throat] different weather in different parts of Southwick. Correct. It could be pouring rain at my house and sunny at the library or snowing at the library and not somewhere
else. So, I think that be >> relevant if you're trying to really look at air quality across the town to put those >> within more dispersed area. >> I think they're supposed to they're supposed to stay planted for a year, correct? Where they are for a year for fracking purposes.
>> Sure. You can find even a resident in the south end of town that'd be willing to put it on their house for you and share their Wi-Fi. I'm sure >> they're live too, right? So if we had an incident >> with something, you could look at a plumes or look at whatever to >> Canadian fires.
>> Canadian fire make a difference. >> Bridges fire, whatever. [clears throat] >> Yeah, >> that's how we got the helicopters last time because the smoke in the valley. Yeah. >> Okay. So, um >> we'll make a motion accept or second. There you go.
>> Okay. Dale I >> Oh, thank you. Just a question on this. Um, just >> so there's no there's no question on budgeting when it comes time for budget and she needs to put in three Wi-Fi and
three power bills in addition to her budget somewhere along the line. We already agreed to it kind of backwards. So >> comes with it. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Just know that you need to include that in your budget next year. >> Yeah, I think that's what he's saying.
>> Yeah. But if it's Wi-Fi, someone's already got the Wi-Fi at their place. It's just they operate on the Wi-Fi. >> Is it wireless? >> That No, she said Wi-Fi, not cellular. I asked her specific. So, >> she needs or >> it just needs a plug and then it'll connect, you know, it needs electrical power, but
>> and approval on the network or whatever. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Just >> Yep. No, absolutely. know a lot of these things they come with you get equipment it comes with a grant but it doesn't come with the service plan or it doesn't come with >> or you have to wire it in or do whatever.
>> We should probably vote though. >> We we were going there. Yep. So >> there was there was a >> there was a second and then a question I think. >> Yeah, that's all good. >> All right, so roll call vote. DI >> Doug. Yes, >> I just didn't want to forget the vote. >> Okay, >> thank you. >> Thank you for hanging on.
>> Feel free to stick around for the rest. >> Okay, >> I'm learning. Maybe I will. >> [laughter] >> Maybe acknowledge and approve $50 donation from the Copper Hill United Methodist Women in memory of Alberta Hayden to be deposited into the library gift account.
>> So move. >> Second. >> Roll call vote. Dang. I >> Doug Morgan. Yes. >> Russ Anderson. Yes. >> Okay. Other new business. New business. I have none. >> I have one. Okay.
I was approached by a member of the school committee to have us and I I'll put this out tonight for discussion at a future meeting because I don't I don't want to feel like that um we haven't had a chance to socialize
this at all, but they would like to entertain the idea of putting a digital sign at the South Regional School to replace the existing manual sign. Um, and they want to do it and make it
available for use by the town as a whole, town of Southwick and the schools as a whole. Um, they feel it would be um a supplemental to the town crier that's kind of at the center by Berkshire Bank. It's kind of a d it's
kind of getting a little dated. It's kind of hard to convey a ton of information on that sign. These newer signs are much larger. This would be about 6 feet high by 8 feet wide. Um, and they have a I'm going to get these copied off to you guys and and get um
they have a couple of proposals and thoughts, but I just wanted to bring it to the board uh for future consideration to see if that's something that we would like to entertain. It's something that it's probably PEG eligible if it's town supported. It's on town property there. you know, the schools are a lessie of
ours. Um, and it might be a good use. I mean, these these signs have gotten way less expensive than they used to be. You can convey a ton of information and you can update them in a heartbeat. School's canceled. This is going on. Something you're right there. That's a major,
especially the entry to the regional school is a major thoroughfare part of traffic going especially east. >> Yeah. >> Really looking at >> they're Yeah. Down there. Yeah. down at the at the regional school. Um, you know, I had asked if they were thinking about I thought it was at the regional.
Let me double check. >> It says SRS. >> Oh, thank God. Um, because I thought we had talked I had talked to him a couple of months ago and we had said, you know, um, yeah, the bottom of the school road, you know, maybe at the Powder Miller of
Powder Mill and and N57, but they feel that the school has better visibility than traffic coming by and going there. But just something to consider. Um, and if we can carry it under old business and I'll get this distributed to everybody for future consideration. >> Okay.
>> My only concern, we looked at one at public safety complex back when Kevin was here and you just the only rule of thumb is don't go cheap. >> Yeah. >> You got to keep the resolution and you got to keep the >> So, I don't I don't know if the chief's on, but um the police chief, sorry, I
keep my chief square. So, the uh there was a there is one that was made available to public safety to replace the one that's currently either in front of the fire or police. It's going to take a little work to get it there, but the device is
already around. So, the acquisition cost was uh zero, but it's it's more of an outdoor display, like a big tall LCD display, almost a television, but turn horizontal. Um, if you ever decided that that wasn't the
way to go, that you wanted to go to something digital later, you would have already done the work to put the >> Bobby had brought in a one on a trailer to try and sizewise and all that, but just never came up came up. >> We were going to get rid of both signs
and just do one campus. >> Yep. >> That both of us could >> correct. >> You have you have the north side and I have the >> Yeah. Right. He's >> rotating. >> I could just I could just see them packing each other's sign now.
>> It rotates around. >> We [clears throat] stole a few signs. >> That's it for you. >> Uh yes, I believe so. >> Or else you have anything new? >> Not new business. >> Yeah. >> N um just to mention the um cemetery
will be doing a race across America. That's this Saturday at 12 noon. >> Okay. I was a week early. >> Okay. >> You were there. >> Oh, yeah. >> Oh, jeez. >> You could have helped us unload Sunday. [laughter] >> Oh, good. Then I was a day early than I
really needed to be. >> All right. Okay. Um, old business. Discuss and vote. Council on aging seat on local emergency planning committee. This is carrying over from oh, really September. Um
it um from the chair of LAPC I guess the bylaws of LAPC do not >> explicitly list right >> council on aging. >> The funny part is that Cindy Sullivan one of the past directors of the Council on Aging had been the the chairperson
for LAPC for as long as anybody can remember at least four years. Um, but when we went back and looked at bylaws, the position is not one of the ones that's recognized as a voting member. So, we're just looking to take care of that. Our oldest bylaws um that we could find and capture just had a list of aid
positions and that wasn't included. We just want to add that on. We think it's an important part of the town and the operation certainly for communicating to the elderly population and you know conveying messages to them ongoing for public safety and the other things that we do. >> I think it's already on the appointment list.
>> Yeah, I think it is. She's on there appointed till the 22nd, 2026. >> Yes. Yes. >> So, is it excuse my ignorance on this? Oh, you said bylaw. Is it a town bylaw that composes the LAPC or it's your own rules and regulations?
>> City bylaw. >> I I think so. >> I've been in those bylaws enough. I haven't seen the >> I don't ever remember seeing one about LAPC either. That's why >> this is a community. just their own rules by >> and they have the positions that were wrong on the last time >> when it selfformed.
>> Yeah. Whenever. Yeah. >> And it it's a generic cut and paste from somebody. >> Oh yeah. >> Yeah. >> So you're looking for this board to officially adopt a se a voting member scene for council on aging. >> We right the the the committee has
already approved it. We're just looking for for because it is a bylaw to have it adopted by the by the select board. You know, it's not so much the appointment because it's already accept the amended bylaw. >> That's why I'm asking does it does it have to go to a town meeting
legislatively? I don't if we have to we do it, but >> it has to go to town meeting. >> That's why I'm asking when you bylaw gets >> when you imply bylaw, we have a town code book, right? I don't think it needs to. >> We'd have to fix that there. I want to I'm not opposed to any of this. I just want to make sure we do it right. I
think it's it's called a bylaw, but I think it's more rules and operations. >> Yeah, I don't think it origin was ever with the town. It is the committees. >> Yeah, it's just the committees. >> So, because of a little ambiguous, we do all the eyes and cross all the
>> Okay. So, looking for a motion to formally adopt a voting member seat on the appointed LAPC local emergency planning committee. >> So, does that mean that everyone that's
on LAPC now is a voting member except one according to your own rules? >> That's correct. >> So, I'll make that motion. What's that? >> I'll make the motion then to do it. I'll >> abstain. I'll second that and roll call vote D.
>> Doug Moan. Yes. >> Okay. Sorry, you had to wait all night for that, too. >> I I like I run an awful lot of vote, too. >> And just to reiterate, um the COA director was already appointed on 9:25
through 6:30 26. >> Correct. >> Um Okay. Then we have to discuss and vote on grant reimbursements for Tannery Road and Vining Hill Road Culver and we got documents on that before
uh work was some work has been done. This is just uh I guess to have me sign the reimbursement applications two of them. >> So move second. >> Roll call vote Daniel I. >> Doug Mglin yes. >> Ross Anderson. Yes. >> Okay. other old business. I've got
nothing to update. >> I just have one I'll call it old business, but um I heard from Kenny and Peter, Ken Stsky and Peter Cows. would like to come and have a
meeting in front of an appointment with the select board at a future meeting, probably the first meeting in January if possible to kind of discuss what they're doing today and what how they can be of assistance and as we move forward. >> Yep. Got the request. We're going to
have Margaret schedule that. >> Perfect. Thank you. I appreciate that. >> Yep. >> Anything old >> uh old business? Uh you did get your beta draft report. >> Yeah. >> Um encouraging to see it was about 7 million shorter than
>> previous estimates >> except it doesn't include drainage and >> treework. >> Correct. And so I talked I talked with Rich and and I said get get to questions to us. So they'll they'll come in for a final report. My my question was some of
the pricing of where did it come from. Um they they stated that that's a Massachusetts based pricing and that um other like towns but again you don't know if there's based you don't know there there's some moving targets on that >> uh but at least it was some good news. I
did talk with the schools. Uh we're looking at a meeting in the end of January to in regards to community television. Um and then on the front facade we got some initial designs. I'd ask for some other views. >> Oh yeah. I did say that. um that didn't
really show I think what we needed to see. The only thing we saw was in regards to the ADA >> Yeah. >> change. So um we'll see where that goes time goes out. That's all >> um on the beta. So they're going to come in and kind of talk.
>> I I believe that they'll come in and talk of it or um to be determined if it's a separate meeting or or how it would work. But I I believe them I was led to believe that they'll come in and present at a slickly. >> Okay. Great. Like I >> But if you have questions in the
interim, get them to me and I'll for >> I said to the to the last people that threw numbers at us that I'm a numbers person and the first thing I do is see that everything ties out and it doesn't exactly tie out what they went when I go to and you can ask this
question. When I go to the costbenefit analysis that they broke out, >> those numbers don't tie to the one through 17 actual by road. >> Yeah. I don't mean >> they're they're all over the place. So I
don't know which to rely on. >> Okay. >> For you know, assuming all the costs are >> the bigger one, >> then what's the cost benefit if those are lower? Because that's lower. >> Well, there has to be some variables, too. and that do you do a reclaim? Do you do a rehab? Do you know there's
there's different ways of getting to different places. So send those questions. >> I assume that's in that analysis by road, >> right? >> And this is just one rejiggering of the data, but it doesn't match.
>> So I I don't know what to rely on. Wouldn't know what to rely on. >> Forward question. I'll get it. >> Okay. Okay. Um, anything old to discuss? >> School budget. >> Nine.
>> Sorry, I didn't mean to jump on N's turn. >> Go right ahead. >> Thank you. [laughter] >> School budget. >> Well, we had the preliminary budget roundt last Wednesday. Not really. They did send the presentation back to us
then. They're waiting for the first pass budget to come out in early January. uh late January. So, >> we've got some capital stuff that they'll be looking to. So, I just wanted to report back that we
were there for that. So, >> yep. >> Sorry, Nen. I didn't mean to. >> All right. And moving on, we're going to acknowledge payables warrant number 2614B dated November 24th, 2025 in the amount of 710,24.90.
And payroll warrant number 2614 dated December 1st, 2025 in the amount of $313,8646. And that is the end of our business. >> No. Exact. No. >> No. Motion to adjourn.
>> So moved. Second roll call vote live. Yes. Thank you everybody.